Main Menu

Australian Broadcasting Corporation Endorses More ‘Junk Science’

ELEANOR HALL: Australian delegates to an international conference on global sustainability delivered a warning today that the earth is reaching a point where it’s changing beyond our control. Almost 3,000 scientists have been in London for the conference to discuss the relatively new field of earth system science.

That’s how the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) began a story today on ‘The World Today’.

Want to really know what the conference is about and how qualified the scientists delivering the message about tipping points are?

Dear Mr Baaar and JS – I know you’re squeezing those lil’ brains so hard – that it may surprise you to know that Aussie is a big place. Koala might think it’s a long way to the next tree but the continent is much bigger than that. In fact the nice lil’ piccie at http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/about/temp_timeseries.shtml shows you what the various BoM analysis regions cover.

Because they can do maths and keep off the gum leaves they actually have worked out that there is a TREND decline autumn rainfall across LOWER southern Australia and a TREND decline in SW WA. Other smarty pants had noticed that NW Australia was getting wetter.

Now I wonder what happens if you average a nice chubby koala with an emaciated koala about as hydrated as a dead dingos donger. Funnily enough you get a completely average koala. Maybe even a real good koala if the chubby koala was a porker. (although if it was a pig it wouldn’t be a koala I guess). Isn’t that amazing.

So doofuses – you have simply misrepresented the science for about the millionth time. Averaging Australia or the whole MDB does not reveal areas that have had persistent regional and/or seasonal declines. But you might have to read what scientists call “a paper” or two to get that.

Now we could discuss why this may be happening but we don’t want Mr Koala to fall out of his tree.

I can see you have not grasped the concept yet. IWewill try to help you. We will show you a graph or two later today and explain them to you in simple terms. Simple steps at first from the beginning.

Dont feel bad Luke, you are not alone. There are many out there in the same situation, particularly those poor lost souls in government offices. Most have not got a clue about these complex matters. They spend there lives going to conferences and meetings but really need some help.

Latter today we will start right at the beginning with a graph or two, just for you. Even little koalas have to start somewhere and sometimes get angry and have tantrums when they dont understand, but I have learned to be patient.

BTW Luke actually beleives humans can fix this problem by reducing our emissions of co2. You know like OZ reducing emissions by 5% by 2020. You see co2 isn’t well mixed and China and India can increase emissions using OZ coal by 1 billion extra tonnes every year and somehow that doesn’t count. These nuts actually beleive this rubbish, what an embarrassment to Australia.

Our rainfall over the MDB today actually follows the PDO and enso phases and the IOD phases as well.
Change to a cool PDO ( like now) and you get more la ninas and the cool phase IODs brings more rainfall over the SE of OZ plus STH MDB as well.

Just curious Luke why did such a large area like the NT experience drought conditions for over 50 years from 1900, but is a much higher rainfall area today?

Sorry the NT was in drought conditions for nearly three quarters of a century from 1900.
The anomaly shows below average rainfall for all that time but heaps more rainfall since.
Please everyone have a look at this and always use the anomaly graph sometimes as well as trend etc.

This is done under the aegis of sustainability. Mark my word, sustainability will prove to be a scourge far worse than ‘global warming’ ever was. Sustainability involves climate, agriculture, transportation, energy, urban planning and architecture, public utilities, biodiversity, endangered species, use of plastic bags, everything. It provides a unified vehicle for every single activist group out there.

Of course most of the sane people here at this blog understand his point of view but why are Juliar’s labor idiots so dumb?

Today we are watching the huge economy of Spain trying to overcome economic meltdown and yet this country was the one that adopted all the green energy schemes known to man.

It like California is an economic basket case because they have stupidly ridden this so called sustainability fad.
The facts are sustainable ? green schemes are unsustainable when locked into a modern trading economy.
If other countries don’t agree and follow your lead then you’re left stranded like a shag on a rock, completely uncompetitive facing ruin and a much lower standard of living.

But of course Juliar couldn’t care less about increasing co2 emissions. If the emissions derive from countries overseas using our exports of coal that’s just dandy, but emissions from OZ companies are BAD and we must suffer the consequences.

Its so simple! Even for government office workers
Rainfall has significantly increased all around Australia over the past 110 years. The graphs tell us that. We did not even need all those CSIRO bureaucrats to help us figure it out.

I won’t post it again but please go to my last post at the ‘Government Funding Corrupts’. It may help to re instate a little bit of levity here.
It’s a humourous example of what we’re trying to discuss.
The conclusions and assumptions are completely outrageous but there isn’t anything wrong with either the data or the statistical analysis.
Hmmmm….I wonder what’s wrong with it?
If we insert Australian data into that analysis we could be even more alarmed at these findings.
It’s likely WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT.
They MUST be banned immediately! Far Far more dangerous to us than guns!
chuckle 🙂 🙂
And BTW Luke….just asking….if Anthropegenic impact (and I do say IF) is the reason why we have higher rainfall in the NT….(which is mucking up those hypothesised trends BTW)….wouldn’t that be a good thing in the general picture?
I asked because I’m getting very confused trying to obtain some ‘results orientated or purpose orientated’ comprehension between the lines of your blustering and ranting.
What is the PURPOSE of all this?
What are we trying to achieve?
It’s still looking remarkably like that academic pissing contest that Walter Starck referred to.

I presume this will only be understood by the more sane people here, but here goes.

I believe in climate change as in NATURAL CC.

That’s why we have had rain lately and drought before the rain, DUH. Droughts and flooding rains, get it?

The PDO and IOD were created by warmists? Well I’m not surprised that Luke would beleive in any/every idiot creation myth, but to beleive that there wasn’t a PDO or an IOD phenomena present in our oceans until the last couple of decades has to be the joke of the Holocene. NOAAs reconstruction of the last thousand years of the PDO just happens to support De Deckker’s work, but what would they know?

Of course they weren’t NAMED until very recently and therefore not properly scientifically UNDERSTOOD until very recently but the beginnings of ocean oscillations like these would be a very long time ago.

I think Luke was so impressed with the upward trends BoM rainfall graphs that he is now busy expalining it all to Tim Flannery and Mrs Bligh’s hubby. They will all see the light, as Luke surely has. Word will spread and eventually even the Department of Climate Change will disappear and save us all $100 million a year.

PDO and IOD are not responsible for the southern Australian autumn rainfall decline. The PDO doesn’t support De Deckker’s STUDENT’s work at all It’s not even on that scale for a start. The PDO is in proxy records for at least 400 years. Just waffly poorly constructed ill-informed commentary Neville. And you’ll do everything to avoid reading the definitive study on SEA by SEACI. Anything.

Glad you have had the opportunity to look at all those upward trends on the rainfall graphs.

Actually the bears have just completed a pattern recognition analysis of Queensland rainfall using a technique from artificial intelligence known as neural networks. The bears demonstrate that using this pattern recognition method the results are superior for rainfall forecasts compared to the BoM and their glorious forecasts using general circulation models. The bears study to be published in a climate journal soon.

Luke?
That study is from 2006. The deepest drought year for SE Australia.
Rather a lot has changed since then and it is no longer statistically valid to say that it is ONLY the north of Australia that is recording increases in rainfall. Remember that pesky decadal influence trap?
It is also full of mights and maybes and could indicates and likelies etc.
It is another theory that needs to be tested by real time data.
It may be right and it may not be.

And also,
I know it could be just a wiggle woggle but look up the rainfall figs in Southern Australia for March.
Last time I checked March was part of Autumn.
It’s definitely going against that trend.
Are you sure the PDO and IOD has nothing to do with it?
BTW I do like some of SEACI’s work. Some of it is useful and thankfully the useful stuff hasn’t been hijacked and used inappropriately to formulate social policy.

Well blow me down – a sneaky bear. If you’re a pattern recognising baaar – not just a scratching and pissing one slumming it on BoM’s site – I thought you may have had some more discriminant in your analysis. So what’s your cross validation hindcast performance and your independent validation stats. How much data did you train on and what was independent for tetsing. Just fess up and we’ll all bow down.

Debbie – I don’t you have a clue how any of this climate analysis stuff works – you have to dissect the stats, the seasonality, the rainfall making mechanisms and what circulation changes are affected. If you can do this without a GCM you’d be a very clever person. The GCM doesn’t prove anything but it does give weight to the veracity of claims – it’s a tool.

SEACI have found a long term decline in autumn rainfall across southern Australia and their best detective work puts to an STRi change. The SW WA attribution studies are mixed and may involve SAM.

Not SAM, IOD, STR position or ENSO (and PDO/IPO modulates ENSO and anit-ENSO behaviour not an end in itself

It’s a hoot how the conference-set have to watch their words as they wobble between new-and-exciting and settled-and-proven. Unlike all other areas of science, there can’t be too much emphasis on evolution and progress without giving the lie to the settled science claims. (A bit late for a change of mind, now Spain has gone broke converting itself to a pin-cushion for wind turbines.)

Still, in the Age of Spin, there are no doubt all kinds of wordsmiths and dogma-dudes to help calibrate that delicate balance.

SD
I don’t question sea level rise one way or other, but recently my parents property, on the very shore of PPhB (Edithvale Melbourne actually) was surveyed, because we put in an application for development.

According to the old documents from circa 1910 the sea levels have not changed a great deal if any.
Comparing the survey results and judging from old photos and landmarks on those photos we are as close to, or as far away from the beach as we ever were.

Who do I believe now? The CSIRO, IPPC, or my lying eyes and surveyors?

There aren’t any planners or little stinkers at CSIRO and BoM Dallas (and may I say what a striking pic) Beaufort. They’re rocket scientists.

JW – “One of the oldest tide gauge benchmarks in the world is at Port Arthur in south-east Tasmania. When combined with historical and recent sea-level observations, it shows that relative sea level has risen by 13.5 cm from 1841 to 2000 (Hunter et al. 2003).”

So if that’s anything to go by the observed change would be about 8cm in that time. Your lying eyes and surveyors aren’t that good.

Phil Watson said further research is required, “to rationalise the difference between the acceleration trend evident in the global sea level time-series reconstructions (models) and the relatively consistent deceleration trend evident in the long-term Australasian tide gauge records”.

So unless we change to nuclear power we have to expect CC? Who dreams up this idiocy, I thought at least BB had a bit more common sense than that.

For the zillionth time, “the climate changes naturally all the time”, get over it. We could close down OZ and the entire OECD tomorrow and it wouldn’t make a scrap of difference to the weather, climate or the temp.

We shouldn’t be doing anything about reducing co2 via us or the OECD countries because simple maths tells us it just can’t achieve anything. In fact a zero return for spending all those billions for decades to come.

But we should sensibly spend any spare borrowed $ on R&D and adaptation and who knows we may find or unlock some new cheap way of cutting back on co2 because it’s much cheaper to do so.

Juliar and her lying numbskulls only worry about reducing co2 if it’s sourced from Aussie useage. They are quite happy to increase coal exports overseas every year to supply all those countries with the means to out compete Aust in the market place and produce more jobs and industry for anyone/everyone but Aussies.

In the meantime we’re left using useless, unreliable, super expensive solar and wind power. This provides a guarantee that the Aussie economy must suffer and become more inefficient into the future. What a colossal fraud and con just to cripple Aust and Aussies.

Luke, I can’t be bothered with arguing with you, you are a natural born naysayer.

There is an old concrete pier about 2Ks down the beach at the Chelsea Lifesavers, I talked to locals and they say the water at the highest tide used to run over the top, now it doesn’t happen unless there is a strong southerly wind is accompanying the tide.

Are you telling them that the pier has risen a few inches?

The sea is not at the same level everywhere, you should, and I know you know it, but you still can’t help but pushing your catastrophist line.
Get out of the office a bit more Luke!

Yes Luke,
a long term decline in Autumn rainfall can be plotted, so can sea level rises.
Problem is, those figures make sweeping assumptions based on long term averages that do not recognise that different areas behave differently and perform in direct contradiction to the long term trends.
The more useful work is the work that drills down into specific areas such as catchment areas.
The long term averages are almost next to useless as a tool because of the massive variabilities.
That also applies to sea level rises.
The assumption inherent in the PR is that we can control and manage the climate based on those long term average trends. Further claims are being made that it is getting out of control and we MUST do something about it.
It is political rhetorical nonsense.
I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t keep researching climate trends and climate variabilty but I seriously question the stated justifications for using long term average trends as policy making tools.
The climate and the natural environment are not interested in conforming to long term average trends on a global scale.
To some extent we can influence it at a regional scale but even that is subject to inexact ranges.

Some say the water hasn’t risen so fast since the A-bomb. Others reckon it slowed down around the time that Harold Holt went for his long swim. Hard to tell when you’re dealing with millimetres over long periods. Being scientifically inclined, I’d have to go with an ocean connection and say it was Holt.

“This generation has experienced more peace, freedom, leisure time, education, medicine, and travel than any in history. Yet it laps up gloom at every opportunity. Consumers do not celebrate their wonderful field of choice and, according to psychologists, say they are “overwhelmed.” When I go to my local superstore, I do not see people driven to misery by the impossibility of choice. I see people choosing.”

JW , I can’t be bothered with arguing with you, you are a natural born denier. Sea level rise is complex with local effects, weather changes and decadal up and down signals. As well as channel conditions between Queenscliff and Portsea. Why don’t you trundle down the road to CSIRO at Aspendale and tell John Church where his life long research is wrong based on your little anecdote. I’m sure he’ll give up after your “science” input.

Whenever you make a good argument and prove a point most of us here gracefully accept and acknowledge it.
You do make sense at times you know!?

All I can say about sea levels is that if you have structure constructed 80 odd years ago and according to science, quoted by you, we had a sea level rise of 80 mm, which is close to over 3 inches, AND we cannot detect any sign of it on said structure, than I’m afraid I do believe my lying eyes. Due respect Mr J Church.

Luke 2cm or less anyone can be accused of not noticing, but please 3 Inches???

Ps I’m not lurking here all the time, I have other things to to do, I just checked in and saw your post.

Luke,
John Church’s life long research is being used to attack other people’s life long and often generational livelihoods.
Is John Church doing that personally?
Probably not.
Why are you trying to make this about personalities?
Who is verballing whom?
It isn’t about personalities.
That tactic is purely political and has absolutely sweet FA to do with genuine science or anything to do with using science to help us understand the world around us.
The science is being used inappropriately. It has no more chance of delivering the political expectations than those who are being attacked and used as political footballs.
In fact the scientists are being used as political footballs as well.
Nobody has said that science is completely wrong.
However, we have a political agenda claiming the opposite do we not?
That is what is completely wrong.

The evidence offered was “I talked to locals and they say the water at the highest tide usedto run over the top, now it doesn’t happen unless there is a strong southerly wind is accompanying the tide.”

Well isn’t that scientific. So we’re being offered a SECOND hand anecdote as THE evidence when you have the research hub on such complex matters down the road. Next minute you’ll be making up half arsed cause-effect-correlation stories to make a science point.

Luke
You may huff and puff all you like, but I’d still prefer hard, observed evidence to modeling.
As I said, the pier did not rise out of the ground, my parents house is still as far from the shoreline as it ever was.
Anecdotal schmanecdotal, if an object used on occasion to be submerged at times but not any more, then that is good enough for me.

I mentioned this before, get out from your office and smell the air, look at the sea, listen to the boyds, they are still here you know?
Maybe then you will get a new perspective on things.
On the other hand, have it your way, who cares?

I’m not huffing and puffing and who is talking about modelling? I’m not rebutting with “modelling”. You have presented a second hand anecdote for a single location.

There’s decadal variation from PDO/IPO – also El Nino/La Nina. Not all areas around the globe are showing rise uniformly. Port Phillip Bay is a shallow waterway where the outlet is dredged for shipping which affects tides and residence time. All makes for a very complex story. Just the dredging of the ocean passage is enough in itself.

So if you think an anecdote about a datum point is a global analysis – don’t do science.
And irrelevant as it is I was in the bush most of today? so what?

Of course with all the erosion at Portsea – maybe it’s sea level rise ….. ooooo….

You will have to watch out for our paper. It will be published soon. The bears tested 19 locations in Queensland for monthly rainfall forecasts and had lower RMSE at 18 compared to POAMA forecasts. The bears used a laptop and neural network software costing under $1000. The BoM has supercomputers costing tens of millions and armies of people in there. The bears win.

Just about says it all.

Time for a big downsizing of the government. We could fire 75% of the parasites starting with the Department of Climate Change – an instant saving of $100 million a year. The Queensland Climate Change Office also goes – what an enormous waste of money!

I don’t see any sea level rising, SD maybe a thousand miles from here can’t see any, some of the Pacific islands actually growing in size, but generally speaking the seas have risen.
Fair enough.

We had longer and more severe droughts and bigger more devastating floods, more frequent and damaging tropical storms and cyclones in the past, but just we wait you say, we ain’t seen nothing yet.

The last two summers were quite cool and pleasant as far as I’m concerned, but according to the spokesman from the BOM, I heard him a couple of weeks ago, these two summers were still above average.
There must have been some really cold summers in the past if we can still mange to get the average up. Either that or the poor statistics get a nasty workout lately.

And I’m not even saying, that the sea levels never changed, we have proof that they were much higher and much lower in the past, we know the temperature and rainfall was different in the past.

I’m not arguing any of that Luke. What I’m p..off about is the constant haranguing and harassing us about our guilt of causing it all with our wicked CO2.

You make sense sometimes but most of the time you are singing from your CC hymn book.
It does get annoying.

Robert – look don’t bluff me with your internet trickery – on here bigoted redneck opinions are much more important than evidence or science. Look a bloke down the pub said it was all bullshit and didn’t exist. So do you want to believe the internet or the bloke down the pub. it doesn’t exist.

Who do you know works there? The only thing that exists is GetUp and they employ actors.

So what happens Robert is you to make stuff up about people you don’t know. Right ! That’s how stupid sceptic blogs work.

Then you do a bit of verballing. A gish gallop gatling gun is always handy. Pick on a few celebs. Bit of cherry picking. Ignore the general and pick an obscure exception. The ol’ commo world govt one is good if you run out of ideas too.